[Shotimes] Re: OT: Pontiac Fiero or is it Firero? :)

[Ron Nottingham]

First off, no stock Fiero was ever faster/quicker/better handling than the
same year stock Corvette.

Second, yes, Chevrolet, in a way, did kill the Fiero.  There were several
engines that were planned to go into the Fiero, but never made it due to the
fact that the Fiero's performance would have equaled, bettered, or come
close to the Corvette for WAY less money.  One engine that was considered
was an all-aluminum 2.9L V6 (no relation to the 60-degree Chevy V6) with
twin turbos.  The Fiero with this powerplant was considerably faster and
handled much better than the Corvette.  Remember, this was 1984, and the C4
was all new, Chevy couldn't have it's 30 year old sportscar nameplate
humiliated by a new upstart.  Twin turbos were canned, but even the normally
aspirated version was just as quick as the 'Vette, and still handled much
better.  This engine was sadly scrapped.  The next engine scheduled for the
Fiero was the 1.8L SOHC I4 Turbo (as seen in the Sunbird GT, Olds Firenza,
and I think Buick's iteration of the J-body).  This engine gave the Fiero
performance very close to the Corvette, for WAY less money.  The last engine
was the 2.8L Chevy 60-degree V6 with cast iron block and aluminum heads.
This engine made the Fiero slow enough that it wouldn't embarass the 'Vette,
and with the extra weight, it wouldn't out-handle the 'Vette either.  The
2.5L I4 "Tech-IV" or "Iron Duke" was always going to be the base engine.

Since the HO version of the 2.8L V6 wouldn't be ready for full production
until the '85 model year, the only version of the Fiero for it's debut year
would be the 4-cylinder.  This really did more to hurt the Fiero's sales
than anything.  Extreme sporty looks, but econocar performance.  Then the
fire fiasco (which only affected the 4-cylinders and not the V6 models) gave
the Fiero a bad name.  The original Fiero suspension wasn't the best
sounding on paper, and was used to get the car to market quickly and at a
cheap price.  The Fiero used a modified Chevette front suspension up front,
and a modified Citation X-11 in the rear.

As far as horsepower, the 85 V6 model had 135hp, where as other GM's used a
125hp version. 86, 87 and 88 used a 140hp version of the engine, but the
most hp other GM cars got was 135hp in 88, most were still the 125hp or
130hp version.  The 5-speed wasn't available with the V6 until '87, 85 and
86 got by with 4-speeds.

By the time the 88 Fiero came around with it's much improved suspension, GM
decided that there was not enough profit in a 30k-40k a year vehicle (first
year sales were above 100,000, but kept getting lower every year).  Even
though "Chevy Brass" didn't kill the car after the 88 model year, they did
have a big hand in the whole deal.  Who knows, if the Fiero would have had
one of the original scheduled V6's or even the turbo-4 it's first year,
maybe we would still have a Fiero, or maybe it would have lasted a little
longer than it did.  It's all speculation, though.

OK, the 350Z hasn't died...  It's sales are better than Nissan had hoped.
Now, what killed the RX7, MR2, and 300ZX (Supra, Stealth, and 3000GT came
later) in the 95/96 model years were several things.  One was a weak dollar
and a strong yen.  Another was OBD-II and stronger emissions regs in 96 (the
RX7 could not meet emissions).  The 300ZX could not meet Federal side impact
standards for the 97 model year.  The Supra stayed until '98 and the 3000GT
until '99 (I think the Stealth died around 96/97).  The redesigned Eclipse
was supposed to be a replacement for both the turbo Eclipse and the 3000GT
(hence the V6 in the new Eclipse).  The Supra was killed by higher prices
each year.

DOH! didn't mean to write a book :-)

Ron N. - Dalton, GA
90 SHO
89 325i
"It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile"


----- Original Message -----
From: "Donald Mallinson" <dmall@mwonline.net>


> I don't think there is much truth to the rumor that the
> Fiero got "too close" to the vette, and was killed by Chevy
> lobbying. The last year Fiero, WAS the best one ever, much
> better suspension (earlier ones had CHEVETTE suspension for
> God's sake) and more HP, better styling and it was finally
> the car it really should have been from year one.
>
> If that is the case (Killed by Chevy brass), then the Chevy
> guys also killed the RX7, MR2, 350Z and the Supra.  All
> specialty cars that died about the same time.  It was just a
> horrible time for expensive (or even affordable) toys.
>
> Yes, GM wants to keep the Vette the top dog, that is why you
>   didn't see the new GTO get the 400 hp motor that Bob Lutz
> kicked around.  I am sure he got the "word".  But awful
> sales killed the Fiero, not Chevy.
>
> I believe Ron Porter can back me up on this, he owns or has
> owned a Fiero, and knows more about them than me.   How
> about it Ron?
>
> Ian Macoomb wrote:
> > Any truth to these quotes:
> >
> >
> > "The 1988's had superior suspension, superior engines, brakes, and
wiring,
> > so much so that they killed the line.  Rumours are because it
outpreformed
> > the corvette of the same year in everything but top speed.  Hmm 13G or
53G
> > (I'm guessing, I have no idea what corvettes went for back then). "
> >
> > "Yes this is accurate.
> >
> > I have this article in Road and Track Magazine.  The car didn't
outhandle
> > the vette, but was more nimble because of its size.  Additionally, they
> > reduced the output of the engine, and put a governer becasue it had a
higher
> > top speed - bahaha - and also used half of the gas.  Out accelerated the
car
> > in 1/4 times.  Not rocket science, car weighs almost nothing, RWD with
> > R-engine setup = good weight distribution.  Becasue of this many people
have
> > opted to go with an engine conversion, which makes these cars
dengerously
> > quick.
> >
> > THis same issue happened with the Grand National, Cyclone and Typhoon,
and
> > Camaro  All detuned to not beat the flagship car - Corvette. "